Environmental Law

U.S. to Ensure Spot Tests of Organic Foods - NYTimes.com

By STEPHEN HOLZER

The Department of Agriculture said on Friday that it would begin enforcing rules requiring the spot testing of organically grown foods for traces of pesticides, after an auditor exposed major gaps in federal oversight of the organic food industry.

via www.nytimes.com

This article is at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/20/business/20organic.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1269080792-vJUiPOd0DGgWmFGyGKOtEA.

You should read the article-the failure of the government adequately to enforce the certification standards of the National Organics Program leads the government (and organic "purist" groups) to look for more bureacracy and more funding (we're out of money guys!) rather than to question whether the government approach to regulating everything that moves (or grows) is worthwhile in the first place.

The Food & Drug Adminstration has just (March 8, 2010) come out with a statement that "organic" produce is not necessarily safer than produce with out such designation:

"Are cosmetics made with ?organic? ingredients safer for consumers than those made with ingredients from other sources?

"No. An ingredient?s source does not determine its safety. For example, many plants, whether or not they are organically grown, contain substances that may be toxic or allergenic. For more on this subject, see FDA Poisonous Plant Database7. Under the FD&C Act, all cosmetic products and ingredients are subject to the same safety requirement: They must be safe for consumers under labeled or customary conditions of use (FD&C Act, section 601(a). Companies and individuals who market cosmetics have a legal responsibility to ensure that their products and ingredients are safe for the intended use."

See http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ProductandIngredientSafety/ProductInformation/ucm203078.htm

So going "organic" is a lifestyle choice, not a health and safety choice. To appease "organic" activitsts, however, even at this time of severe fiscal crisis, the Obama Adminstration nevertheless proposses to raise the NOP's budget from $6.9 million to $10 million and nearly double the NOP's staff from 16 to 31.

The flaws in this NOP enforcement expansion are multiple-

The burearacy and inefficiency of government has prevented the program from working well in the first place.

Second, even if the program could be made to work effectively to enforce the goal of ensuring the government's "organic" strandard is met, one would need staff and a budget many times the size of the expansions being proposed.

Third, with a $1.6 trillion federal deficit and $12 trillion in national debt, this would hardly be the time to propsoe such an expansion for a lifestyle--as opposed to health and safety--program.

The mind of man, which attempts to regulate everything out of some primordial desire to impose order even where none is required, is on full display here.

Full post as published by Environmental Legal Blogs on March 20, 2010 (boomark / email).